Regional survey of foundation trainee doctors’ views on a career in gastroenterology: implications for diversity and inclusion

Abstract

ObjectiveWe aimed to establish the perception of foundation doctors (FDs) towards gastroenterology, focusing on identifying determinants which make the career desirable or undesirable between genders, and to recognise factors to increase diversity in recruitment.MethodAn electronic survey was circulated to Northwest of England FDs, categorical variables and data were analysed using χ2 test including comparisons by gender and exposure to gastroenterology either as an undergraduate or FD.Results133 responses were received (males 55.6%, 37 foundation year 1 (FY1) doctors, 85 FY2 doctors and 11 FY3 doctors). Four (3.0%) FDs were considering a career in gastroenterology. Gastroenterology was perceived positively by 72 (54.1%) of FDs. Significant differences were found between genders in the importance of the following factors influencing specialty selection; patient-centred care (female 52.5% vs male 25.7%, p=0.01), good mentorship (female 67.8% vs male 45.9, p=0.012), income (female 33.9% vs male 59.5%, p=0.003) and length of training (female 27.1% vs male 52.7%, p=0.003). The male predominant existing workforce (female 27.1% vs male 6.8%, p=0.001), and requirement to be a medical registrar (female 74.6% vs male 56.8%, p=0.033) were negatively perceived aspects of gastroenterology among female FDs. Most FDs (female 80.5%, male 70.7%) indicated increased acceptability of less than full time training and greater flexibility may attract more females to gastroenterology.ConclusionIncreased flexibility in training and greater postfoundation exposure and mentorship may improve diversity within the specialty. The role of general medicine poses significant concern for FDs and may need further evaluation.

Changing Faces of Authorship: A Study of Gender, Race, Regional Disparities in Gastroenterology/Hepatology-related RCTs. A Two Decade Analysis (2000-2022)

“…Furthermore, a recent survey of gastroenterology fellows by David et al [32] and Advani et al [16] showed that female fellows perceived the absence of same-sex mentors as gender bias in the workplace which was a significant deterrent for them to pursue a career in advanced endoscopy or gastroenterology in general. In another survey of foundation doctors, gender disparity in gastroenterology itself was cited as a deterrent to selecting gastroenterology as a speciality [33].…”

“…However, as argued by Oxentenko et al [38], increasing female representation in the academic pipeline alone may not be effective with the gender parity achieved in medical school enrolments in high research output countries for over a decade [39,40,41]. Instead, organisational allyship of female researchers with male allies, mentors and sponsors, sensitisation of male allies to promote women researchers, and support for female researchers to overcome imposter syndrome and microaggressions may be necessary for a systemic change [15,33,38].…”

BSG cross-sectional survey on impact of COVID-19 recovery on workforce, workload and well-being

“…27 Waning interest among junior doctors in applying for gastroenterology and hepatology specialty training may be addressed by schemes that encourage more flexible training and clinical exposure. 28 Limitations of this survey include the low response rate and potential for confounders and selection bias within the respondent group and lack of non-responder demographic data for comparison.…”

“…The RCP has lobbied the government to double medical school places over the next decade26 and introduce an amendment to the Health and Care Bill to ensure greater transparency and accountability in long-term workforce planning 27. Waning interest among junior doctors in applying for gastroenterology and hepatology specialty training may be addressed by schemes that encourage more flexible training and clinical exposure 28…”

“…27 Waning interest among junior doctors in applying for gastroenterology and hepatology specialty training may be addressed by schemes that encourage more flexible training and clinical exposure. 28 …”